Tag Archives: slr

Commentary, Equipment, Ideas

Why Can’t Digital Cameras Be Like Film Cameras?

13 Comments

I was in San Francisco today with my family and my sons wanted to visit a Salvation Army store to check out old camera equipment. Both of them are intrigued by the older 35mm film cameras. In the display case we saw a couple Canon AE-1 cameras, a Canon AE-1 Program (?), and an Olympus OM-1. These are, if I’m not mistaken, cameras from the 1970s. “Back in the day” I shot with a couple of small Pentax bodies from the same ear, the ME and the MX. (Each son has one of those bodies now.)

At this point, I’m a confirmed digital photographer – I have virtually no interest at all in shooting film again. I can sort of understand the retro appeal of film, and I don’t resent those who like to use it. (Though I’ll admit that I can get a bit annoyed when some folks become self-righteous about it… :-)

That said, the better cameras from the era are beautiful little mechanical/optical marvels. At one point I pulled out my excellent Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens – a great performer and a lens I rely on a lot – and held it next to the 50mm f/1.8 lens from the OM-1. My Canon lens simply looks like a big plastic toy next to the efficient and well-crafted little metal Olympus lens. And the body of the camera is solid and tight, and barely larger than the biggest point and shoot style digital cameras today. The control systems are simple and direct – the OM-1 aperture and shutter speed controls are both on the lens barrel, a simple switch turns the meter on and off, there is a MLU switch, and the viewfinder with its match-needle meter is big and bright. These are cameras that don’t give the appearance of trying to look like space ships and that don’t shout “my camera is bigger and more expensive than your camera!”

If a current manufacturer came out with a DSLR body like these, I’d be an immediate customer.

By the way, early happy birthday to Jameson – and enjoy your new OM-1!

(Update: After a comment from Jim Goldstein, I clarified a few things about this idea in a follow-up comment.)

Commentary, Equipment

In Praise of the Canon 5D II, and Why I’ll Wait a Bit Longer

2 Comments

I’ve used the Canon 5D for the past few years, and it is a very fine camera for most types of photography and an excellent camera for my photographic purposes. I find the advantages of the full frame sensor to be compelling: potentially higher image resolution, a greater range of useful apertures, the ability to shoot at smaller apertures than on cropped sensor cameras, and so forth. Any criticisms of the camera that I might have are truly minor. (A mirror lockup button would be nice… ;-) Other photographers have agreed, and the 5D has probably been the most popular full frame DSLR until now. It is a favorite of those who shoot landscape, and I’ve seen people using it successfully to shoot almost any type of subject.

Given the relatively brief product life of DSLRs – they are often replaced by updated/new models in as little as 18 months – many had been expecting an update to the 5D for some time. When Canon announced and released the new 5D Mark II (5D II or 5D2 for short) this fall, the excitement among Canon photographers peaked. At some discussion forums I read you might find that half of the posts concerned this camera at times!

The specifications explain why the 5D II is such a compelling camera. The photosite density of the full frame sensor has been increased, and the new model has a 21+MP sensor, nearly double that used in the original 5D- but with higher ISO capability, greater dynamic range, and no increase in noise. It incorporates newer Canon DSLR features including “live view,” an exciting HD movie mode, Canon’s sensor dust reduction system, the ability to fine tune the auto-focus system to your lenses, increased “weather resistance,” and more. All of this and the price has actually dropped a few hundred dollars from the list price of the original 5D. 

Many photographers have gone to great lengths to be the very first to get the new camera. They have signed up on “waiting lists.” Some have paid pre-order fees so that they would “have dibs” on the first boxes to arrive. Others frantically post on forum boards asking which dealers have one in stock, and are apparently ready to drive great distances to pick one up. I’ve even seen a few posts in which the writer offered many hundreds of dollars as a “finders fee” to anyone who would locate a 5D II. And you can be quite sure that all of these folks are paying full list price (and more) for their new cameras.

Not me.

There is a pretty decent chance that I’ll get this camera eventually, but I’m in no big hurry to be the “first on my block” to get one. Here are some of the reasons:

  • My existing 5D produces quite good image quality already. While the 5D II is capable of “better” resolution, the difference is certainly one of degree and not a “night and day” difference. When I make good sized prints, sensor resolution is rarely the limiting factor – whatever enlargement limit I encounter is more likely due to focus issues, lens issues, camera motion issues, and so on. Already having a camera that is capable of capturing images with excellent resolution, I’m know that I do not need to rush to get the incremental improvement that the 5D II might provide.
  • I prefer not to be a beta tester.  There is a very good chance that problems will be discovered when the first production run of any product finds its way into the hands of end users. Nothing against the manufacturers (in the majority of cases), but when many thousands of photographers use a new camera it should not surprise anyone that certain subtle issues emerge. In fact, it appears that this may have already happened with the 5D II. I read today that Canon has released a statement acknowledging that they are looking into two issues: “black dots” that appear to the right of bright highlights in some images and banding issues that appear when certain settings are used. Based on my previous experience with Canon, I’m confident that they will resolve these issues, but I would just as soon wait until after that happens.
  • Why pay list price? You don’t have to be an economist to know that the price of an item will be higher when the demand is highest. When a new product is released, typically after a marketing buildup and plenty of “buzz,” there are many buyers who are so excited that they will pay almost anything to get it. Now. No matter what. The manufacturers and retailers are willing to oblige them. ;-) You can get one of the first copies of a camera like this, but you are almost certain to pay a premium for the privilege. If you need the camera right now you don’t have much choice. But if you already have a camera that can produce fine images (like my current 5D) there is little rational reason to buy immediately at the higher price. In a few months we’ll undoubtedly see the price begin to drop.

Here’s my bottom line on the 5D II: I think that it looks like a really fine camera. It provides a very compelling feature set at a very reasonable price. If I didn’t already have a good camera that serves me pretty well, I’d probably plan to pick one up fairly soon. However, I’ll wait until the initial bugs have been identified and fixed in the manufacturing process and until the price softens a bit.

If you are ready to buy, you can purchase this product from B&H Photo via this link and help support this web site – thanks!

Equipment

Canon EOS 5D

1 Comment

Having used my Canon EOS 5D extensively for about two years, I figure it is about time for me to write up something about my experiences with and impressions of this camera. Rather than try to compete with the existing camera review sites and post a bunch of technical specifications and test results, I’m going to focus on aspects of the camera that may give a better general idea of its strengths and weaknesses and of situations for which it is best adapted. Continue reading Canon EOS 5D →

Commentary, Equipment, Popular

Lens Protection: Ultraviolet (UV) Filter or Lens Cap and Hood?

63 Comments

(This has become one of the most-read articles at this site. For some reason, the question of whether or not it makes sense to add these little filters to your lenses generates a lot of interest… and sometimes a lot of lively debate. Portions are now a bit dated — the article comes from 2007 — but the general concepts discussed here still hold. From time to time I make small updates based on new information or questions that have come up. Note that there are links to a couple of related posts listed near the end of the article.)

Sellers sell, and some buyers buy, ultraviolet (UV) filters for their cameras. The main advantages are said to be twofold: some reduction of haze that is invisible to the human eye but which the camera purportedly might register, and some protection for the front element of your lens.

On the other hand many photographers wouldn’t think of putting an extra layer of unnecessary glass in front of their lenses. They would rather accept the (rather small) possibility of a scratch on the front element of a lens than possibly reduce the quality of their images, and/or they prefer to protect the lens by using a lens cap and lens hood.

I’m in the latter camp. I no longer use any UV filters* and I can think of darned few situations in which I’d want to use one. (One possible exception being the use of fully-sealed lenses on which the seal is completed by adding a front filter – and here only if I were to use the lens in an extremely hostile environment and with a fully environmentally sealed camera body.) My preference is to handle my camera and equipment relatively carefully, keep the gear protected when not actually using it, use a lens cap, and to almost always use a rigid lens hood.

Continue reading Lens Protection: Ultraviolet (UV) Filter or Lens Cap and Hood? →